Downvoting; a stakeholder's duty or a stakeholder's option? To me, the notion of duty to mandatory downvoting is fascism at its worst.

in #hive2 years ago (edited)

Apparently some users believe that not using your downvoting power, is a good reason for your post to be downvoted... 😂 Since we are talking votes, we are talking politics. And since we are talking politics, we are talking about attributing value to the policies applied on the blockchain. What would Aristotle say if he were a hive/steem user?

Well, Aristotle thought there was only one legit way to perform rhetoric. That was the ability to address each point of your counterparty with a logical argument. The first wrong way was to use emotion, to move your audience far from logic. And the second wrong way was to personally attack the counterparty drawing the attention to personality faults of the person making the argument, which may or may not be correct or valid.

Now, let's go back to the notion of mandatory use of downvote power and why I believe that this is a fascist notion, far from the freedom the blockchain is supposed to represent.

First of all, from a user perspective when someone publishes a post, believes he/she has something to say. The user is making a statement and/or an argument. The community members may wish to review the statement, upvote if they agree, downvote or ignore if they disagree or are indifferent. When I downvote a post means I am actively engaging with the blogger, expressing my disagreement with his/her statement and wish to reduce the reward claimed.

To have the option to actively disagree with a statement is a freedom to be enjoyed. But happens when a downvote becomes an obligation?

An obligation forced with an indirect threat of powerful users that you will be downvoted irrespective of your content, statement or argument you make?

Firstly, as Aristotle would agree, a downvote irrespective of your CONTENT is a direct charge on your personality. Democratic,NOT! Ripping you of rewards attributed by many other members of the community that have actually followed your argument, is an assault to the community itself.

Secondly, let's assume that a member needs every cent earned on the platform and allows for this threat to bully him/her and decides to use the downvote even though he/she hasn't been using the downvote power so far. Best case scenario, the member finds posts that he/she doesn't like which he/she is pleased to downvote. To be needing the rewards, means that this member is not a big stakeholder. What are the odds that he/she will downvote a crap post by a rich user and increase chances for a potential downvote war? Zero. Nada. What will the poor member do? He or she will downvote another poor member, whose downvote means nothing. So we end up with two small stakeholders gaining nothing else from the platform but AN UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCE And that's the best case scenario, where the post downvoted is sort of crap.

Worst case scenario, the user downvotes a post irrespective of content... Just because he/she has to in order to escape the branding by the downvote obsessed whale. The moment this happens, a person becomes a bully for the sake of a few cryptos (or even a fraction), or out of fear of losing reputation due to the downvotes.

At the very same moment another user gets frustrated by the unfair downvote, and depending on the type of content and the blogger's personality, the blockchain will suffer the loss of excitement, engagement and participation of yet another person.

And what is the value of a social media platform, if not the number and the experience of its users??

Of course, a rich user is not necessarily a content creator or a serious content curator... A major stakeholder maybe a simple investor who does or doesn't understand the value of empathy and kindness on any social activity, having been an M&A banker for over 15 years I know that it is the high valuation of best use, of goodwill and of the intangible assets and not the obvious value of an asset, that makes people walk away with unexpected wealth.

In any case, I have been in this community since its early steps, and I have seen it go through 40 waves. I have been upvoted, I have been downvoted, I have been curated, I have been ignored, my art has been loved by some and I have loved others for their content and for their personality. I have even fallen in love, moved in and broken up with someone from this community.

BUT I HAVE NEVER EVER DOWNVOTED ANYONE nor will I, a) because I have only a few good traits in my character and one of them is positive criticism as a means of improvement, b) I allow myself to accept different opinions without engaging in meaningless confrontation and most importantly c) I don't wish to hurt or worry or discourage anyone in a virtual world whose sole existence is to make everyone happier! I am not a FASCIST, will never be.

So if this means that I will become downvoted by those who think I should use my downvote power, so be it. I will find another way to become a rich bitch. For my friends out there, I will remain your friend.

PS. The artwork is a repost, I created it a couple of years ago a d posted on Steemit

FB_IMG_1590445615406.jpg

Sort:  

I'd say something but, the last time I did, things just got worse. The focus now is onboarding new users. Any issues those of us who've been around for years have will most likely fall on deaf ears. The perspective of the actual content creator and the artists isn't something taken seriously. Many people agree, there are issues. Most won't say much about it out of fear of being bullied and that's not irrational because we've seen it happening for years.

It's true... However, under those circumstances I do find it difficult to recruit people anymore 🤔

A lot of folks who could/would be here still enjoying the platform became disillusioned or have gone silent for various other reasons. A lot of drama with the hardfork and consequences from that pushed people away. I already saw some noobs/unknowns taking massive downvotes simply for having a good day. It's important the environment doesn't remain as toxic and sees improvement.

I don't expect perfection but I certainly can't see myself involved in setting new people up for failure. The only thing that would help retain users and encourage new ones to join and push towards success would be a productive and healthy/vibrant community; people having fun.

The rewards aren't enough to tie people down. So many other avenues now to earn online. Stiff competition. Then we can get into content quality. High quality simply can't exist if the pros are pushed around. It's great to bring in a hundred amateurs daily as new members but if they can't find success on their own after a year or two, all this platform will have are new amateurs in the door while the experienced types consistently leave. Then it becomes impossible to build a market/captivated audience since they too would leave if they can't find something that appeals to them, or their favorites get pushed out. If there's nothing here for the consumer to buy, they won't see a need to purchase tokens, power up, and become investors. You know as well I do all the money in arts and entertainment comes from those people who enjoy it. Give them nothing, they won't spend.

So it's a vicious cycle. I would hope large investors could see the damage a few poor decisions could cause over time but over the years and after what I've seen become commonplace, I've lost some of that hope. This place needs leaders, not rulers. Some don't know the difference.

You said it all... I couldn't agree with you more. Also when it comes down to rewards, some would still stick around if they found that their voice is being heard, their talents are recognized irrespective of the amount of $$ they earn. Irresponsible downvotes take away the emotional reward as well.

I agree. These people have zero morales or self awareness. They will advocate for “freedom” but punish people for minding their own business. They will downvote good quality content, upload shit content and expect rewards.

They want people on blacklists so that there is a dog piling of downvoted to try and drive people away from the platform. How is that conducive to growth?

It's not... But like many people around the world who obtained power and influence quite easily they are driven by self righteousness and lack of empathy.

I'm seeing several things on the platform that really discourage me from painting, I usually post once a week but I started my next painting just today.
I've read some posts where people complained about the lack of creativity of others and made awful comparisons, even if it didn't relate to me directly, it made me feel bad and really self-conscious about every artistic decision I make, something fun turned into uncomfortable.

I hope this kind of behavior is related to the quarantine and when it's over everyone will get back into a better state of mind, I really do.

Thanks for writing this, Marianda, your voice into the subject is very important.

You mustn't allow the ill intentions of others get on the way between you and your creativity. It's a noble thing to do. Those who embrace negative criticism are nothing more but noise. Nothing constructive will come from their opinion. But much good will come, if one learns how to make the noise less loud in their own head first, and then in the broader community.

Nice post, nice thinking. I agree Marian!
Since the downvote pool was introduced last year,
i have been seeing it as a "Karma Trap", and no real
contribution to the community.
It even invites downvote bots, https://hive.blog/hivewatchers/@luca1777/is-dein-problem-a-downvote-bot
Did i dream this, or wasn't there once a 3 downvotes per day limit?
Anyway, downvoting sucks, ignoring is enough.
I am probably guilty of using it maybe once a month for some clown trolls,
but i wish downvoting would be gone or at least limited.
Thank You for this post.
100% up!vote and reblogged ;)

Thanks very much @luca1777 for your comment. I think you did well to downvote troll posts, if downvote has to be used it should be for the correct reasons! 😉

Thank you for your post, this topic "moves" me, too.
There are/have been a couple of cases where downvoting makes sense, like when the witnesses
downvoted Justin Suns post down to 0 ;)
But 80/20 i wanna concentrate on the lovers, and forget/ignore the haters...

"b) I allow myself to accept different opinions without engaging in meaningless confrontation and most importantly"

I definitely need to improve on this. :-S


By the way, I think that the downvote that you received on previous post may be related to art being a repost. Not sure.
Generally it is not welcome on Hive to repost old content from Steemit as old Steemit's blockchain is a part of current one.
It is also a scope within Hivewatchers that would be considered spam-farming with recycled content.

Unless the reposted artwork/photography has been acompanied by new content such as substantial thought added to it, new story, ideas, etc. :-)

Thank you @logic for your comment ❤️ I don't mind the downvote for reposts,or any downvote that is addressed to my content... after all I added the repost tag and made perfectly clear that I had posted this again 2 years ago to give the option to users not to upvote it. They chose to upvote me in any case. If someone else wishes to downvote my content it is fine. Also as you may have noticed I make no reference to a specific account.

I wrote the post following a chat I had with a couple of old Steem/Hive friends of mine who told me that many users (mostly artists) got downvoted again and again because certain hive members (previously steemit members) target those who don't use their downvote power. Artists of course won't downvote other artists. It's a harsh world already.

Now, I am not sure who hive watchers are and I don't give a damn because honestly post or repost, when it comes to my content at least it's original. I created it and if I wish to share it on Hive, on Steem, on Facebook, on Instagram again and again I will do so because ART is about communication, reaching people in hope that a part of you will touch a part of the audience. It's about exposure.

The $$ earned on these platforms is ridiculous for minnows, and in fact I have always been investing my own money to be able to give a positive vote to my following. Of course when I hear about these endless nerd wars I reckon I need to always cash out my initial investment. Best for them, the big stakeholders, to improve the platform in a way that it is attracting funds.

Adding repost tag is a good way to communicate it. The thing is that most of curators don't read the posts and if they do read some part of them, they seldom look at the tags at the bottom.

The repost thing, even if mentioned is currently considered farming. There was a crosspost feature added few months ago by one community but recently they decided to remove rewards acquired on crossposted posts because of spam and exploitation.

Since we moved to Hive, there have been at least 50 users found who started farming with effortless posts by recycling their old posts. Once certain user does it, others follow as they think that it is acceptable.

In the end everyone would start doing it when it becomes a norm and the platform would become one big pile of recycled spam with no value added. That would go completely against Proof of Brain on which the platform was designed upon.

Facebook cannot be compared to Hive/Steemit. This is a completely different platform. Just as Twitter is.
Also no one is rewarding anyone on FB, Twitter, Instagram like it is on Steemit/Hive.

Hive is made up of at least 70-80% of Steemit user base. Basically vast majority of users moved to Hive. Your old posts from Steemit are part of Hive blockchain. Just exchange steemit.com with hive.io in url. Steemit has become part of Hive history due to shared blockchain up until Hive emerged. All have been reported by the community being angry that someone just spams with effortless posts they already created and got rewards for from the community that is mostly part of Hive community now.
There is no issue in posting the same new post both on Steemit and Hive at the same time, of course. Recycling only relates to posts published on Steemit before it forked to Hive.

I could do it myself. Start recycling hundreds of posts that I have created within years and just farm rewards. I have never recycled a single post.

Artists have been certainly ignored and undervalued. The work is hard and their art has been under-rewarded but I do not think that art related posts should have special licence to recycle.
I don't think it is really a big deal if you repost the same art but add a paragraph or two of new, original thoughts about the content being reposted. This would mean that you add something new to the content.

Hive is miles away from Steemit. There are no more bidbots and many vultures have been eradicated. It is driven by the community in much more efficient and creative way.

I hope that my explanation helps you to understand that problem.

You have been quite elaborate with your explanation and thank you. I don't disagree with you, never did actually that a downvote on a repost is a legit way to express your disagreement on attributing value to an older post. I wrote that this is a repost not only on tags but on the main body as well, so that noone can accuse me of trying to rip off rewards or exploit the system. Actually it was a steepshot post two years ago that doesn't display anymore. I don't believe that artists have been mistreated, on the contrary it has been an opportunity for everyone. My view however is that it is a social media platform with diverse topics displayed, of a very different nature. Of course I absolutely respect your point of view that different content shouldn't receive different treatment.

Now, back to the topic of my post which is mandatory use of downvote... it was a topic of discussion back in 2016, when flagging wars raged, and it is a topic of discussion today. I find this view extremely toxic and dissapointing. I also gave Hive priority over Steemit, but mainly due to many witnesses being my friends and not wanting them to get screwed over... but that doesn't mean I will agree with everything they do or did or continue doing.

To be honest, I have never heard about use of downvoting power as being mandatory. Unless it was a project that got delegation for it from stinc to fight abuse like spaminator or steemcleaners.

It would be surprise for me if such requirement was requested by anyone on Hive. If there is someone who is trying to force you to downvote, please let me know. This is unacceptable.
If you don't want to mention publically, you can find me in Discord.